Main menu

FBI's recently expanded surveillance powers

After a good, long run, we have decided to close our forums in an effort to refocus attention to other sections of the site. Fortunately for you all, we're living in a time where discussion of a favorite topic now has a lot of homes. So we encourage you all to bring your ravenous love for discussion to Chuck's official Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and Instagram. And, as always, you can still post comments on all News updates. Thank you for your loyalty and passion over the years. These changes will happen June 1.

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 grants the FBI unprecedented power to obtain records from financial institutions without requiring permission from a judge. "

...

"The law also prohibits subpoenaed businesses from revealing to anyone, including customers who may be under investigation, that the government has requested records of their transactions. "

What a son-of-a-bitch. You can now be investigated and you not ever know about it. How the hell is this legal? Does anyone know how this kinda crap isn't deemed unconstitutional??? I fucking hate Bush.

[i]Originally posted by bronskrat [/i]
[B]from the [url=http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,61792,00.html?tw=newsletter_top...
"While the nation was distracted last month by images of Saddam Hussein's spider hole and dental exam, President George W. Bush quietly signed into law a new bill that gives the FBI increased surveillance powers and dramatically expands the reach of the USA Patriot Act.

The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 grants the FBI unprecedented power to obtain records from financial institutions without requiring permission from a judge. "

...

"The law also prohibits subpoenaed businesses from revealing to anyone, including customers who may be under investigation, that the government has requested records of their transactions. "

What a son-of-a-bitch. You can now be investigated and you not ever know about it. How the hell is this legal? Does anyone know how this kinda crap isn't deemed unconstitutional??? I fucking hate Bush. [/B]

shady indeed
it's not unconstitutional because the law he passed makes it legal. now does it conflict with the idea that originally motivated our government to be created, no doubt about it.
i figured the patriot act was frightening enough, i didn't know they could expand on it's blatent abuse of power any more. and the last thing you have to ask yourself when you read stuff like this is "when will enough be enough?"

It is hard to get everyone outraged about this, because the government spews out information about protecting us from terrorism and terrorists. All you have to do is mention three numbers and suddenly everyone is ready to throw away their rights to make sure that they won't find themselves buried under a building someday. We are so easy to scare that we can hardly be bribed to come out of our rabbit holes to protect our rights anymore.

orwell used 1984 as an [b]exaggeration[/b] of an example of what [i]could[/i] happen if the government kept expanding and hoarding power. now comparing america to oceania may suit this specific example, but to say that america is becoming oceania, that would be stretching things more than just a bit. sure the american government does look to be hoarding power, but really it's ever changing, certain things added, certain things taken away. in this particular instance, power was added. the good news is that the american public [i]can[/i] change this law. it may not be an easy process, but with some help of the many watchdog groups, and civil rights/liberties groups, it could easily be brought to the attention of the government that the public, whom the government [b]serves[/b], demands that said bill be rethought.
what i'm trying to say is if america really is becomine oceania, i think you should be more worried than i should, mr. canadian man, your country shares our boarder, your country would be "oceania's" next logical step....

[i]Originally posted by bronskrat [/i]
[B]the law could be found unconstitutional if it were challenged. Any lawyers here in the Cult? :D :D :D [/B]

in that case, yes, it would be unconstitutional, if it was proven to be so. in the meantime, it's completely legal, and i promise, they'll exercize that right more than they should before it becomes challenged or repealed.

[i]Originally posted by HiGhJiNx [/i]
[B]this world is ever changing
deal with it

as far as the laws and the acts
if thats what the government feels necessary, rock and roll [/B]

and you're not at all concerned with securing your own privacy? do you think that the government will use all the data and information they gather with only good intentions? what about your basic rights, namely, your right to privacy? are you willing to toss that to the wind just to fulfill the whim of a government willing to sacrifice the rights of their people, so they can "prevent terrorism"?

im not really sure how i feel about the situation, mainly because i don't really follow what the hell is going on, other than the fact that everything changes and gets addes so quickly
i do, however, feel that privacy is very important, quite possibly one of the most important rights people should have. I'm not sure how the government will use the things they retrieve, i'm never sure of what the hell they're doing, they could say one thing and be doing another, kinda like living and lying to friends, but whatever...
and no i'm not willing to toss my rights in the wind, obviously, to fulfill the government's wishes, but i do wish that i knew what was going on... and i think that the whole terrorism thing is bullshit, and we overreacted to some things, and now the slightest tip off creates orange orange warning warning and now we have to deal with laws and shit like this

so i am definitely concerned with everyone's safety, privacy, and rights, but im not sure how i feel towards the price we have to pay and how the government acts to get their goals, it's just real fucked up to me, and like i said, i just kinda deal with it

i'm thinking, with the information they've already gethered through other means, they've created CAPPS II.
who knows what new and completely unnecessary tracking/privacy invasion program they might implement.
i don't know if this would involve libraries directly, based on how broadly it is worded in some parts, but think of the government being able to seize your library records, credit card records, bank account info, internet history/ip address, without your knowledge or a judge's consent, and keeping all of that information on file, possibly indefinately without you ever knowing they have theri eye on you or your records.
all this can lead to is tracking your every move, and making you nothing more than a walking talking statistic for the FBI.

nah, this related to their being able to obtain any financial document, past bank history, credit card, etc. the Patriot Act itself basically gives them free reign over everything else already.
i'm guessing they had just forgotten about banks and financial institutions when they first wrote the patriot act, and are now editing it in.

"but think of the government being able to seize your library records, credit card records, bank account info, internet history/ip address, without your knowledge or a judge's consent, and keeping all of that information on file, possibly indefinately without you ever knowing they have theri eye on you or your records.
all this can lead to is tracking your every move, and making you nothing more than a walking talking statistic for the FBI."

that not only pisses me off, but it seems like humans are just gonna be almost like eliminated, the world turns into robots, no more thinking, feeling, talking, its just being followed, analyzed, and put into a file,
it's really fucked

[i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
[B]orwell used 1984 as an [b]exaggeration[/b] of an example of what [i]could[/i] happen if the government kept expanding and hoarding power.
[/B]

I know its an exaggeration, just thought I'd bring it up. Someone would have eventually.

Quote:

[i]Originally posted by trypdwyre [/i]
what i'm trying to say is if america really is becomine oceania, i think you should be more worried than i should, mr. canadian man, your country shares our boarder, your country would be "oceania's" next logical step.... [/B]

TRUST ME

I THINK ABOUT THIS ALL THE TIME, CAUSE I KNOW THEY COULD ROLL RIGHT OVER US AND TAKE WHATEVER THEY WANTED, IE. FRESH WATER, LUMBER, OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES.

and you do know mug, that no one would want mexico, but canada, it's a nice piece of property just ripe for posession.
heh, kidding.
i'd like to think that america would come to an agreement with canada rather than take control of it. it would be about as backwards as taking over switzerland. you're all nice and neutral.

[i]Originally posted by HiGhJiNx [/i]
[B]this world is ever changing
deal with it

as far as the laws and the acts
if thats what the government feels necessary, rock and roll [/B]

This is the exact kind of complacency I am talking about. Don't know, don't care, right?

It is beyond me how anyone can just say "meh, if the government says so..."

What happened to thinking for yourself, and your inherent rights? To say that the world is changing and that we should just accept it is the kind of talk that gets you completely controlled and mindless. I am not ok with blindly accepting these changes.

[url=http://news.com.com/2100-7352_3-5137344.html]...And in other news, the "feds" are trying to gain the ability to wiretap VoIP[/url]
VoIP stands for Voice over Internet Protocol. for those of you who haven't had the chance to hear about it yet, VoIP would allow you to make phone calls made over the internet, thus making your long distance calls cheaper. it's fairly newly implemented technology in the states.

Important Disclaimer: Although this is Chuck Palahniuk’s official website, we are in essence, more an official ‘fansite.’ Chuck Palahniuk himself does not own nor run this website. Nor did he create it. It was started by Dennis Widmyer, who is the webmaster and editor of most of the content. Chuck Palahniuk himself should not be held accountable nor liable for any of the content posted on this website. The opinions expressed in the news updates, content pages and message boards are not the opinions of Chuck Palahniuk nor his publishers. If you are trying to contact Chuck Palahniuk, sending emails to this website will not get you there. You should instead, take the more professional route of contacting his publicist at Doubleday.